‘Religious Ethics cannot provide good answers to questions of sexual ethics – a rational approach is needed’ Discuss.
The ethical theory Natural Law is based on analysing the position and purpose of humans in the universe, e.g. to defend the innocent, live in an ordered society, learn, reproduce, worship God etc, therefore it appears to be entirely reasonable; in fact Aquinas, the theory’s founder, stated 'To disparage the dictate of reason is equivalent to condemning the command of God. ' Considering the teleological thinking of natural law and analysing the purpose of the penis it seems rational to decide that using the penis for anything other than reproduction seems rationally wrong.
However, taking into account the consequences of the deontological secondary precepts which natural law imposes it becomes apparent that the end result of millions of Africans catching AIDs due to the banning of the use of contraception appears to show the system as irrational. The atheist ethical system of utilitarianism, for example, appears to show the flaws of Christian ethics. The principle of utility, greatest good for the greatest number, leads by definition to the most pleasure and least pain, this certainly seems more rational than condemning millions to suffering because of a certain understanding of the purpose of humans; indeed even if God exists and intends people to fulfil their purposes it could be argued that God would wish to contain AIDs by compassionately allowing the use of contraception. In the utilitarian’s eye the allowing of contraception would lessen the pain of AIDs and maintain the pleasure of sexual relations; this seems rational as a traditional utilitarian will always make a decision which will by definition result in the most pleasure and least pain possible in that particular circumstance.
However, the atheist theory and its scientific nature is not